FOLLOW UP TO PREVIOUS QUARTERLY REPORT

PIIAC has not received the Chief's Response to the Second Quarter 1996
Monitoring Report; we will include it with our next monitoring report.

The PPB Training Division informed the citizen advisors that their fall
training sessions will address some concerns we have identified. They will teach
a course in "Situational Management," which will explore strategies for officers
to help prevent tense citizen encounters from escalating. This course will
address communication techniques. We particularly appreciate PPB's having those
instructors meet with PIIAC staff during the course development phase. The fall
training will also clarify the Bureau's position on "distraction blows."

IAD / PIIAC ACTIVITY

I. Cases Appealed / Monitored

During the Third Quarter 1996, PIIAC advisors heard four new appeals. We
continued one appeal until the October meeting, in order for the appellant to
provide additional information to the citizen advisors. In the remaining three
appeals, advisors voted to uphold the original PPB findings -- two
declinations(2), and one "Insufficient Evidence."

Advisors also reviewed two appeals that they had previously returned to PPB
for additional work. They supported the findings in one, but did not in the
other. In the latter instance, the additional investigation was sufficient but
officer and complainant statements were contradictory with no hope of reaching
real resolution. Advisors voted to request review by PPB's Review Level
Committee. They felt a more appropriate finding would be "Insufficient
Evidence." That request is pending.

PPB's Review Level Committee reviewed an appeal that advisors heard during
the second quarter. Not only had an initially weak investigation prompted its
return for more work, but the additional information seemed to support a finding
of "Insufficient Evidence" rather than "Exonerated." PIIAC Staff and a citizen
advisor participated in the Review Level Committee deliberations, and Review
Level members voted to change the finding.

We monitored thirteen additional IAD investigations.

Cases monitored and appealed reflected the following types of allegations:(3)

Property

1

Use of Force

9

Conduct

10

Disparate Treatment

1

Communication

4

Performance

0

Procedure

2

The findings reflected the following:

Unfounded

6

Exonerated

5

Insufficient Evidence

3

Sustained

4

Suspended

2

Declined

3

Of the four complaints sustained, all were sustained for Conduct --
specifically, some form of illegal or irresponsible off-duty conduct. One
complaint was additionally sustained in the category of Procedure when an
officer failed to obtain permission before taking his police vehicle home. Two
of the four officers against whom complaints were sustained were reserve
officers. In a third case involving a reserve officer, his commander recommended
a sustained finding, but the PPB Review Level Committee decided on "Insufficient
Evidence."

II Timeliness

Timeliness has improved but continues to fall short of Bureau goals. Among
those cases investigated, time taken from receipt of complaint to when the case
was closed out ranged from six weeks to eleven
months, with an average of five months. Although IAD
has added a fifth investigator, and IAD investigators are assigned cases with
more serious allegations, the investigators carry a significant case load.

Bureau commanders must share responsibility for the problems with timeliness.
Among those cases reviewed this quarter, commanders held several past the
deadlines -- sometimes by several months. In one case, the commander did file a
request for extension, and explained the reason for the delay. In other cases,
no explanations were provided. The Review Level hearings were consistently
timely. We will continue to track post-investigation timeliness. Meanwhile,
we recommend that PPB address this topic with commanders, and that IAD
develop a reminder system for tracking when adjudication deadlines have come and
gone.

III. Quality

Among those cases monitored and new appeals reviewed, quality of
investigations and interviews were generally good, both in IAD and at the
precinct or division level. In fact, one non-IAD investigator was particularly
effective in calmly exposing the inconsistent and illogical statements made by a
less-than-forthcoming reserve officer, to the extent that the officer turned in
his badge and resigned before the interview had concluded.

Only two precinct-level investigations were weak, for exactly the reasons
described in our previous monitoring report. We understand that IAD Capt. Jensen
is providing training to both IAD and precinct-level investigators. In addition,
he scheduled the IAD detectives for an intensive course in advanced interview
technique.

IV. Disposition Letters (Precinct/Division Level)

In a previous report, the citizen advisors expressed concern about authorship
of disposition letters. Chief Moose responded by saying that he had no problem
with letters authored by precinct or division commanders reflecting the support
and review by IAD.

We are still seeing some disposition letters that do not include such a
statement, which we believe is critical in inspiring confidence in Bureau
accountability. We recommend that all investiations or inquiries handled
by non-IAD staff be reviewed by IAD before a final disposition letter be mailed
to a complainant. The letter should inform the complainant that IAD has reviewed
the case and concurs with the finding.

MEDIATION

City staff are further refining the Police-Citizen Mediation Pilot Project.
Only one case has been mediated this past quarter; seventeen remain officially
open.(4) The Office of Neighborhood Associations (ONA) is
working closely with the Neighborhood Mediation Center (NMC) to establish more
specific protocols and time lines for completion. They are working to implement
a database system for case management, and hope to provide more regular case
updates then.

NMC staff appeared before the citizen advisory panel in August. We were very
disappointed with the presentation. The staff did not seem well-organized and
were unable to provide satisfactory answers to some of the advisors' questions.
They have agreed to provide a follow-up report at the November meeting.

Since PPB is now regularly identifying and forwarding cases to NMC after a
slow beginning, we cannot afford to have the process break down. Only one case
mediated in 1996 is completely unacceptable, and we encourage the efforts to
bring about improvement.

KUDOS

This quarter, kudos go to Officer Rich Austria and Capt. Ron Webber of the
Training Division for providing an excellent tactical demonstration to the
citizen advisory panel. They demonstrated handcuffing procedure, and methods for
removing a resistant subject from a vehicle. Advisors had questions about these
matters after hearing a particular case in June.

Kudos also go to Capt. C.W. Jensen and the IAD investigators who are all very
cooperative and responsive to PIIAC staff and advisors.

Footnotes

1. Mayor Katz' Police/Citizen Accountability Initiative,
adopted by City Council January 1994.

2. A complainant appealed a declination to City Council
(PIIAC) who upheld the advisors' recommendations.

3. PPB definitions of allegations and findings are appended
to this report as Attachment B.

4. Several additional cases reflect that one of the parties
ultimately withdrew or declined before the mediation could occur. In several
other cases, the complainant cannot be located or is otherwise unavailable.